God Debate Is Worthless

[Sweetdeath]

The only thing that really bothers is that some people believe so strongly, but have no evidence what-so-ever to back it up.

Their answers are always like how a child would answer. "Because it's the truth."

How can someone honestly believe in a being that won't intervine when a woman is being raped or a child murdered?

They say things like "God has a grand plan" to attempt to justify these heinus acts of violence. Instead of praying to Santa claus, people should follow factual science.

-sweetdeath

[slapdashartist]

I think the God debate is worthless to some extent. The question of God's existence is unprovable, even with evidence, because religious people have ways of finding ridiculous loopholes. The truly faithful will either manipulate the evidence to fit into their belief or deny it altogether (and will insist that Atheists do the same thing). There is just no way of debating the issue without fault, because both sides are pointing the fingers to each other. I both agree and disagree with the original posters suggestion of unhinging a religion piece by piece. But I think the effectiveness of that method or the alternative depends on the stage of a persons belief. There are some people who have reached the point of no return. There are those so blinded by faith that any amount of evidence to the contrary will have no effect whatsoever.

Another reason the debate is pointless is because it is a debate over something so ambiguous. The only way to properly debate something is when everyone is using the same definition. But with so many different interpretations of what 'God' is, it's practically impossible to define. And with that I think Tweentythree is right in their suggestion of raising question towards the credibility of specific religions. But again there are those people so set in their faith that any question of their belief will fall on deaf ears.

I don't think the debate is completely useless however. Keeping the issue open allows for more question. It is a way for those in search of answers (not just out to defend their point of view) to gather evidence of their own. It gives the points of both sides to allow someone on the fence to understand and make a more informed decision. Questioning a belief is always better than accepting or denying it completely without any knowledge of the alternatives.

[xSilverPhinx]

I see.

I really think there should be a religiously themed IQ test out there that measures how well the religious person can reconcile the bible with itself.

The Bible says so much about so many things that if two people debate the Bible, the person who knows it better will win.  When I was a theist, I could mostly reconcile the Bible if given enough time when debating an atheist.  Now that I'm atheist, I can mostly point out passages that theists can't reconcile.  It's all how you spin it.  You have entered... the spin zone!

Context, context, context...

[The Black Jester]

Another reason the debate is pointless is because it is a debate over something so ambiguous. The only way to properly debate something is when everyone is using the same definition. But with so many different interpretations of what 'God' is, it's practically impossible to define. And with that I think Tweentythree is right in their suggestion of raising question towards the credibility of specific religions.

This is an excellent point, and is one of the reasons I started using the term "ignostic" to describe my atheism - you have to first posit a specific definition of 'god' to refute, or even to discuss it.  Without that, the debate is futile.

[ThinkAnarchy]

I think it is mostly pointless. I don't really debate it, but I like discussing these topics with people. I usually just try and make them understand why their claim is extraordinary and why the burden of proof falls to them. I will also give my reasons for not believing, on top of their lack of credible evidence. I tend to only enjoy the debate aspect when it's a religious individual I can't stand.

One of my old friends is a Baptist who volunteers at his churches camp for children. We avoid the topic most of the time, but when we do discuss it, it's always civil.

It's usually only when the religion is infringing on the rights of others that I feel the debate is worthwhile.

[Sweetdeath]

It's usually only when the religion is infringing on the rights of others that I feel the debate is worthwhile.

Sadly, religion is the main reason same sex marriage isn't legal, and abortions are still illegal in some places. Politics are religion are hand in hand. Separation of church and state never existed.

It's easy to control people through fear, and religion spreads fear through the masses.

-Sweetdeath

[ThinkAnarchy]

It's usually only when the religion is infringing on the rights of others that I feel the debate is worthwhile.

Sadly, religion is the main reason same sex marriage isn't legal, and abortions are still illegal in some places. Politics are religion are hand in hand. Separation of church and state never existed.

It's easy to control people through fear, and religion spreads fear through the masses.

-Sweetdeath

I agree with your statement. I could not buy booze on Sunday's because of religious individuals infringing upon my liberty. They also target prostitution, drugs, and casinos, all of which I believe should be legal.

Regardless, that is a political debate, not a god debate. Many atheists probably support the drug and prostitution laws as well. Assuming this is true, should we debate atheism or the political issues at hand?

I honestly believe if we got most of these people to admit there likely isn't a god, their political positions would remain steadfast. This is purely an assumption, but I think it's a logical one.

In hindsight, I didn't write my previous post as well as I should have. I suppose what I should have written is that I would debate the religious regarding the political issues, inevitably, it would probably turn into a "god debate."

I hope this isn't confusing, I'm typing this as I figure it out in my mind.

[Stevil]

I have found the god debate really useful.

It has helped me come upto speed on what the strongest arguments are, for and against.
It has given me a better understanding as to why theists believe.
Theists seem to get strong value from the Cosmological and Complexity arguments. I see these arguments only focused towards people who already believe.
Hot topics for theists are objective morallity, afterlife, and purpose.

Theology of itself has grown to be an incredibly complex and intricate beast. Probably steming from the static and limited nature of scripture that requires interpretation. With no interactive god to gain clarity, theistic organisations have put much effort into deciphering meaning and knowledge, to the best of their ability. In my view this is a difficult position for them to be in, with no real feedback to know whether they are on the right path or not. This also creates a great dependancy between them and their church, at least the devout ones that religiously go to church.

There is no bridge between theology and reality (spacial, temporal, material). The only revelation was that of Jesus (for Christians), but his time came and went before people kept concise records of deaths and births, before fingerprinting, before audio and visual recording. All there is, is a bunch of books, sexist in nature, grutesque in substance, childlike and simple from which much interpretation must be made in order to make sense of it. Catholics make claim to a devine church guided by god and tradition. Eurochristic miracles provide reality proof of blood and flesh but it is well guarded from DNA testing by the clergy.

There will likely never be a bridge of proof which can be used to prove religion, and the faithfull, don't want it.

My perception is that religion is simply conceptual with a promotion into reality by the faithfull without requiring any of the constraints of reality (spacial, temporal and material).
This is what I have learned and derived from my debates about god.

[Sweetdeath]

@ThinkAnarchy:
I think that a lot of people follow the rules because God says so, but it would be interesting to see if someone thinks the same way without religious influence.

I for one am not against alcohol or gambling, but I am against prostitution.
That view is because selling sex encourages human trafficing, which, to me, is one of the most evil things in existence. I also believe in true love, because i'm a cheesy romantic ;_;

[ThinkAnarchy]

@ThinkAnarchy:
I think that a lot of people follow the rules because God says so, but it would be interesting to see if someone thinks the same way without religious influence.

I for one am not against alcohol or gambling, but I am against prostitution.
That view is because selling sex encourages human trafficing, which, to me, is one of the most evil things in existence. I also believe in true love, because i'm a cheesy romantic ;_;

I'm curious about that as well.

As for the prostitution thing, I would imagine the legalization of prostitution would cut down on human trafficking. At least for the purpose of sex. Legalization would make the industry safer for both the workers and the clients. It would also likely attract more women into the profession based on increased monetary gains; i.e. health plans, higher wages, etc. The industry is legal in Reno and their workers are kept safe, aren't coerced into the industry, and sexual diseases are very limited.

I can say for certain it wouldn't encourage human trafficking, at the worst it would remain steady, however, it would likely decrease. The illegality of the industry is what encourages the trafficking, not the industry itself. Much as illegal drugs increase crime, not necessarily the drugs themselves.

Sorry for getting off topic, it happens a lot with me.

[Sweetdeath]

I totally agree with you for the most part. I know that studies do show the legalization of things/easy access to does decrease certain crimes.

The issue I have is just the constant objectifying of women. I live in a pretty shitty neighborhood in Nyc and it bothers me to see sex demeaned so much. Like I said, I just believe in love and not so much lust.

I think selling one's body for money is pretty gross. It'd so hard to explain, because it mosy definitely is a gray area. I think.it can be both an advantage and disadvantage, but sex being thrown in your face makes me very uncomfortable. I'm just not sure its going to make the world a better place for women who already have to work twice as hard to be taken seriously.


I apologize for going off topic, but mostly I don't want to come off bitchy, cuz i'm actually really nice! XP <3

[ThinkAnarchy]

You don't come off bitchy at all.

I can understand that point of view but disagree with it completely. I base my views on an individuals right to do as they please so long as it doesn't infringe upon another individuals positive rights. A woman selling her body for sex is a voluntary transaction, just as buying a t.v. is. Oddly enough, legalization lessens the objectification of women. From what I've read about the legal brothels in Reno, NV, the women do not have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. Many of them are in college and only have to work a few nights a month. Granted these are high class establishments and there would certainly be bargain whore houses if it were legalized. But I again feel that aspect of the industry would be no worse than it is today.

I imagine you object to it because you feel it may cause more violent crimes against women. I simply don't agree with criminalizing acts because it could lead to violent crime. I feel some drugs increase violent crimes, but don't feel the drugs should be illegal. The crimes they commit while on the drug is enough. Criminalizing the act that may lead to violent crime is a lot like the prosecution of "Thought Crimes" in 1984.

As for women being paid less than a man. I would actually like to start a new thread about that since I think it may cause an interesting discussion. I will send you a PM with the link to the new thread so you can at least watch the lecture video about this. I am curious of your reaction to the video.

[The Magic Pudding]

I for one am not against alcohol or gambling, but I am against prostitution.
That view is because selling sex encourages human trafficing, which, to me, is one of the most evil things in existence. I also believe in true love, because i'm a cheesy romantic ;_;

I don't like the idea of prostitution, I probably suffer from romantic notions, not sure if they're cheesy.  Having sex with someone who hates it, or someone who is so hardened they feel nothing, it's not very appealing.

Prostitution has been around a long time so they say, and it's not going away. 

Where I live it has been legal for many years, I can't think of any reasons why it should be illegal.  It is regulated, a brothel can't be placed in residential areas or near a school.  Pimps and corrupt police are less likely to be involved.  Prostitutes can organise and their representatives can provide input when issues are discussed by the broader community.

It's easier to require condom use, if a client becomes unruly a prostitute can claim assistance from the law, they don't have to hide from it.  Australia did a lot better than most countries when Aids arose, I think this is partially put down to the ability to demand condom use.

A regulated industry would seem to be less likely to attract people traffickers.  An entrepreneur has a choice of cheap labour and risk of arrest, or doing things legally.  This choice doesn't exist if everything is illegal.

[Stevil]

I for one am not against alcohol or gambling, but I am against prostitution.
That view is because selling sex encourages human trafficing, which, to me, is one of the most evil things in existence. I also believe in true love, because i'm a cheesy romantic ;_;

I don't like the idea of prostitution

It's legal in NZ, I'm all for it. If people want to pay for sex and others want to make money off it then why not.
I've heard it is safer than casual one night stands.

It's not my cup of tea, but I think others can have/do it if they want.

[iSok]

I for one am not against alcohol or gambling, but I am against prostitution.
That view is because selling sex encourages human trafficing, which, to me, is one of the most evil things in existence. I also believe in true love, because i'm a cheesy romantic ;_;

I don't like the idea of prostitution

It's legal in NZ, I'm all for it. If people want to pay for sex and others want to make money off it then why not.
I've heard it is safer than casual one night stands.

It's not my cup of tea, but I think others can have/do it if they want.

Hmmmm, that's not entirely true. On the face of it, it seems harmless. Here in the Netherlands it's also legal.
But recent research has shown that many prostitutes come from Eastern Europe, they are actually forced to do the job.
Back there, different jobs were promised, like waitress. But when they arive here, the situation is quite different.
The language barriere, fear of getting kicked out of the country (they are illegal) or even worse; getting killed if they go to the police, forces them to continue their work.

There's a whole woman trade behind this system.